1. Field of the Invention
The field of the invention relates to systems and methods by which limitations on an activity may be enforced through biometric identification. More particularly it relates to a system and method where player may place limitations on their gaming activity and which includes the capturing of biometrical data for enforcement of such limitations.
2. Description of the Related Art
Gaming is a highly regulated business. Some gaming jurisdictions have identified problem gambling as an issue which suggests a commercial response. One response has been to set monetary daily limits for players. For example it has been known for riverboat gaming to limit player's to a bankroll (the amount the player can wager with) of a certain amount each day. Another technique has been for regulators, the gaming venue or the player themselves to exclude the player from play. Such exclusions rely to a great extent on vigilant casino personnel. Such exclusion programs have shortcomings such as that an excluded player can circumvent the exclusion by evading venue security or using a disguise or can simply travel to another venue where the exclusion does not apply.
Where a player voluntarily seeks to exclude or limit their gaming activity, enforcement may be implemented additionally through the venue's player loyalty system. Player loyalty systems are well known such as the Bally CMS® system sold by Bally Technologies, Inc. of Las Vegas, Nev. These loyalty systems include player registry where vital information is given by the player and a player account is established in the system. The player is given a magnetic stripe card encoded with information so the system can tie the card to the player's account. When the player plays a gaming device or table game they present their loyalty card. At a gaming machine the card is presented by the player inserting their card in a card reader. The data is read and the system account is accessed. Players use their loyalty cards to receive “comps” such as money back, meals, lodging or the like provided by the casino.
Where a player “self excludes”, i.e. voluntarily places limitations on his/her gaming activity, presentment of the loyalty card alerts personnel to the presence of the excluded player who can then take steps to seek enforcement of the exclusion.
Self-exclusion can be evaded by the player avoiding casino personnel and not presenting their player loyalty card. Further the player can simply travel to another gaming venue where he/she has not self excluded or has not enrolled in a loyalty system.
Regarding player loyalty systems it has been known that such systems can be used across several gaming venues. Boushy, U.S. Pat. No. 7,419,427 issued Sep. 2, 2008 and titled “NATIONAL CUSTOMER RECOGNITION SYSTEM AND METHOD”, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference, discloses an example of such as system.
It has been suggested that passive biometric identification be used in a gaming environment to identify players and “undesirables”. Cumbers, U.S. Pat. No. 7,175,528 issued Feb. 13, 2007 titled “PASSIVE BIOMETRIC CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING SYSTEM”, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference, discloses an example of such a system. The system disclosed in this reference suggests the use by a player of a personal identification number (PIN) to reduce the number of files against which the biometric sample must be compared as well as culling stale data related to players who do not meet play frequency requirements.
A drawback to prior self-exclusion programs is that, as discussed above, an action is required by the player such as presentment of their loyalty card. A player wishing to evade the exclusion can simply not use a card or use a companion's card. Additionally the player who is self excluded at one venue can go to another nearby venue.
A drawback to using passive biometric identification is that as the number of records grows the probability of returning a false positive, i.e. an incorrect match, increases. As one might imagine a large casino in Las Vegas with hundreds of thousands of visitors per year will quickly be servicing a record of perhaps a million or more files. Where there are affiliated properties such as the casino properties owned and operated by MGM Resorts International in Las Vegas alone, the number of files would quickly exceed several millions of files.
Regarding biometric identification as the biometric data file inventory grows so does the false acceptance rate (FAR). In a work titled INTRODUCTION TO MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM SECURITY, Simon Foley (department of Computer Science University of College Cork) Nov. 21, 2008 (http://www.cs.ucc.ie/˜kieran/cs3090/pdf/lecture14_security.pdf) it was postulated that where the FAR is 0.000001 a 50% chance of a false match would occur regarding fingerprint records when the number of files reaches 1000.
There is a need for a system and method where a user can commit to behavioral limitations (or such limitations can be imposed by others) such as in gaming and where the limitations can be enforced using biometric identification. In gaming, the limitations may be in regards to losses, wins, amount wagered, time or the like. There is a need for a player to able to self exclude without the use of a loyalty card. There is a need for a system and method for a player to place limitations (including exclusion) which can be enforced through the passive gathering of biometric data and which reduces the chances of obtaining false matches. There is a need for a system and method which can use biometric data enforcement across multiple venues such as venues in close geographic proximity.